The "Middle East and Terrorism" Blog was created in order to supply information about the implication of Arab countries and Iran in terrorism all over the world. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists.

From the Ethics of the Fathers: "He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it."

Friday, January 5, 2018

Without Iranian subsidies,
Hezbollah would be just a narco-mafia.

Ironically, Iran's receiving
more than $100 billion in frozen assets succeeded in breaking the
solidarity between the Iranian people and the Ayatollahs' regime better
than the sanctions did.

Without Iranian money, Hezbollah would not exist. At least, not
exist as an Iranian foreign legion, militarily engaged against Israel
and in other Middle East regional conflicts. Without Iranian subsidies,
Hezbollah would be just a narco-mafia.

Hezbollah has developed deep connections to Mexican and Colombian
drug cartels, directly to facilitate the distribution of drugs
throughout the Middle East and the US.

In the holy city of Qom in Iran, on December 30, 2017, anti-regime demonstrators shouted "Death to Hezbollah", "Aren't you ashamed Khamenei? Get out of Syria and take care of us", and "Not Gaza, or Lebanon".

In an Islamic country, whose official slogan is "Death to America"
and "Death to Israel", to see Iranian people shouting "Death to
Hezbollah" is totally surreal.

By wishing "Death to Hezbollah", Iranians demonstrators were not only
protesting a "rise of the price of eggs" as the Ayatollahs' propaganda
machine tried to claim. The demonstrators were demanding that Supreme
Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei spend Iranian money for Iranian people --
and only for Iranian people.

Ironically, Iran's receiving more than $100 billion in frozen assets
for the hapless "nuclear deal" succeeded in breaking the solidarity
between Iranian people and the Ayatollahs' regime better than the
sanctions did. During the tough time of sanctions, the Iranian people
stood by their leaders. The people only broke with their leaders when
they saw that the "liberated" money was benefiting everyone but them.

Is Hezbollah eating the Iranian people's bread? The answer is yes,
absolutely. Hezbollah is an Iranian foreign legion, a tool of an
imperialist Shia war being conducted in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and against
Israel. This Arab Shia army was created in Lebanon by Iran's Supreme
Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1982, right after Israeli defense
forces expelled the PLO from Lebanon. The aim of this Arab Shia legion
was to demonstrate to Sunni Muslim Arabs in the Middle East that Shia
Iran was a better fighter against the "Zionist entity" than any Sunni
regime.

How much money is Hezbollah costing Iran? Before quoting an amount, please remember that Hezbollah is not only a 30,000 to 50,000-man fighting army.
Hezbollah is also a social system with hospitals, welfare institutions,
well-diggers for farmers, religious schools for boys and girls, a media
conglomerate (television channels, radios, websites), a private
telecommunications network inside Lebanon, and with the cyber-warfare
capability to destabilize countries or companies. Hezbollah, in other
words, is a state within the state of Lebanon, and the "patron" of the
Shia community there.
Until 2005, experts guessed that Iran was giving about $200 million a
year to Hezbollah. Matthew Levitt, a specialist on Hezbollah, wrote:

"Recently, Western diplomats and analysts in Lebanon
estimated Hezbollah receives closer to $200 million a year from Iran...
Some of this financial support comes in the form of cash funds, while
much is believed to come in the form of material goods such as weapons.
Iranian cargo planes deliver sophisticated weaponry, from rockets to
small arms, to Hezbollah in regular flights to Damascus from Tehran.
These weapons are offloaded in Syria and trucked to Hezbollah camps in
Lebanon's Bekaa Valley. In the wake of the death of Palestinian leader
Yasser Arafat, Hezbollah reportedly received an additional $22 million
from Iranian intelligence to support Palestinian terrorist groups and
foment instability."

Different Iranian "charitable" foundations, many of them controlled
directly by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, also fund Hezbollah's hospitals
and charities in Lebanon. The amount of money difficult to quantify
because it does not appear in any official budget. It certainly
represents many millions of dollars.

In short, without Iranian money, Hezbollah would not exist. At least,
not as an Iranian foreign legion, militarily engaged against Israel and
in other Middle East regional conflicts. Without Iranian subsidies,
Hezbollah would be only a narco-mafia. It is a characteristic of this
Shia militia to have been able to find alternative financing to
compensate for the ups and downs of Iranian financing each time it was
necessary.

Another source of Hezbollah's funding is cocaine-trafficking. Over time, Hezbollah has developed
deep connections to Mexican and Colombian drug cartels, directly to
facilitate the distribution of drugs throughout the Middle East and the
US. The Obama administration quashed a huge Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA) investigation into drug-running, arms-smuggling,
human trafficking, and other criminal enterprises from which Hezbollah
was profiting around the world, according to a bombshell report by Josh Meyers in Politico
in December 2017. For the Obama White House, blocking the DEA
investigation was a decisive move to help finalize its "nuclear deal"
with Iran.

How much money does Hezbollah make from cocaine? Again, it is
difficult to say. From 2007 to 2011, for example, Hezbollah networks
were involved
in a $300-million scheme purchasing used vehicles in the U.S. to ship
to West Africa for sale. Earnings from the car sales were commingled
with drug profits and sent to currency-exchange houses for laundering.

Among other trafficking, according to Interpol, Hezbollah also
counterfeits goods (car brakes, clothes, pharmaceuticals, money). As
early as 2003, Interpol warned of links between counterfeiting and terrorism, and between counterfeiting and Hezbollah :

"In documents prepared for his testimony on 16 July
before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on International
Relations, INTERPOL Secretary General Ronald K. Noble, said the problem
may become more serious in future and he called for enhanced efforts,
including a new partnership between industry and police, to combat it...
"The INTERPOL document presented to the Congressional Committee
indicated that a wide range of groups - including Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah,
Chechen separatists, ethnic Albanian extremists in Kosovo, and
paramilitaries in Northern Ireland - have been found to profit from the
production or sale of counterfeit goods."

Hezbollah also raises funds from the Shia diaspora communities in Africa, Europe, Northern America and is running

"an extensive network of commercial and illicit
businesses around the globe, including in South America and Africa,
which may morph into new enterprises to avoid scrutiny. By using shell
companies, and by renaming companies to avoid U.S. sanctions,
Hezbollah-linked groups can continue to access the international
financial system and transact with an ever-growing network of companies.
The U.S. Treasury Department has designated dozens of Lebanon-based
firms for supporting Hezbollah, including real estate firms and auto
care companies. It is likely the group will continue its money
laundering operations, growing into new fields and businesses in the
future."

Even if Iran cuts its subsidies to its proxy, Hezbollah's 150,000
missiles will presumably remain in Lebanon as a permanent threat against
Israel. Meanwhile, the Hezbollah Shia drug cartel will just have to
work harder to feed its fighters.

The
Indians realize now that Israel is their ally in the war on terrorism --
certainly not the Palestinians, who again and again align themselves
with those who seek death and destruction.

Palestinians also took to the streets to celebrate the 9/11 attacks carried out by al-Qaeda.

Another sign of Palestinian support for dictators and terrorists
emerged in August 2017, when President Mahmoud Abbas sent the leader of
North Korea, Kim Jong-Un, a telegram congratulating him for "Liberation
Day."

Something good has come out of the fiasco surrounding the
Palestinian ambassador's association with a global terrorist: The
Indians realize now that Israel is their ally in the war on terrorism --
certainly not the Palestinians, who again and again align themselves
with those who seek death and destruction.

The Palestinians have an old and nasty habit of placing themselves on
the wrong side of history and aligning themselves with tyrannical
leaders and regimes. Every time the Palestinians make the wrong choice,
they end up paying a heavy price. Yet, they do not seem to learn from
their mistakes.

The latest example of Palestinian misjudgments surfaced last week
when the Palestinian Authority "ambassador" to Pakistan, Walid Abu Ali,
shared a stage with UN-designated terrorist and Jamat-ul-Dawa leader
Hafiz Saeed.

The two men appeared together at a rally that was held to protest US
recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Thousands attended the
rally in Rawalpindi, which was organized by the Defense of Pakistan
Council, an alliance of religious parties dominated by Saeed's group.

Jamat-ul-Dawa has been blamed for the 2008 Mumbai attacks, which
killed 166 people. Saeed is wanted by the US, which has offered a $10
million reward for his arrest. Pakistan, however, has turned down
extradition requests and allows the terrorist to operate freely.

The appearance of the Palestinian Authority ambassador alongside
Saeed drew sharp criticism from many Pakistanis and Indians alike.

Tarek Fatah, a Canadian-Indian writer and liberal activist who was born in Karachi, Pakistan, tweeted:

Thousands took to social media to express their outrage over the
joint appearance of the PA envoy and the wanted terrorist. Many Indians
criticized their government for voting against US President Donald
Trump's announcement recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital in the UN
General Assembly. They also called on the Indian government to correct
its mistake by strengthening its ties with Israel.

"Palestinians have slapped across the face the Indian
government, which has recently betrayed Israel by voting in favor of the
Palestinians (at the UN General Assembly). Hope this would jolt the
Indian government to see the ground realities and formulate a totally
pro-Israeli West Asia policy and follow US and move our embassy to
Jerusalem."

Amitava Sarker commented:
"India should have a strong practical policy on the Middle East. Again,
we should know that progressive Israel is our friend and not
fundamental Muslim countries."

Arvind Singh tweeted: "This is the proof that Palestinians support terrorism. We support them instead of supporting our friend, Israel."

Bobby Kapoor:
"India sides with Palestine as recently as the UN vote while the
Palestinian Authority sides with a global terrorist. India should review
its policy towards Palestine."

Dhiraj Punj:
"Huge embarrassment for Indians individually and for India as a nation.
India votes for Palestine, and they (Palestinians) join Hafiz Saeed.
Foreign policy disaster!!!"

Gpebble:
"The Indian government must support Jerusalem as Israel's capital in
response to this ugly brotherhood of Palestine and Hafiz Saeed the
terrorist generator."

Harvey Kribs:
"Palestinians are Islamic supremacists who seek Islamic hegemony in the
Middle East in the same way Islamic terrorists seek Islamic hegemony in
South Asia. If one puts an end to Palestinianism, the rest of the
radical Islamists will fall by the wayside."

Alarmed by the strong reactions, the Palestinian Authority, in an
unprecedented move, announced that it was recalling its ambassador to
Pakistan.

A statement
issued by the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah said that the
Palestinians were committed to preserving their good relations with
India. "Palestine is keen on supporting India's war against terrorism,"
the statement read. "Palestine and India are true partners in the war on
terrorism." The Palestinian Authority claimed that the participation of
its ambassador in the rally alongside Hafiz Saeed was an "unintentional
and inexcusable error."

An "unintentional error"?

How, precisely, was the ambassador unaware of Hafiz Saeed's presence
at the rally when he posed proudly for a "photo op" with the terrorist?

The Palestinians have a long record of making such "mistakes."
Forging alliances with mass murderers and terrorists goes back to the
days of Haj Amin Al-Husseini,
the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who had close ties with Adolf Hitler and
Nazi Germany. According to British records, Husseini told Hitler during a
meeting in 1941: "The Arabs were Germany's natural friends because they
had the same enemies as had Germany, namely the English, the Jews, and
the Communists." He also thanked Hitler for supporting "the elimination
of the Jewish national home."

Later, the Palestinians threw in their lot with the Iraqi dictator
Saddam Hussein and supported his invasion of Kuwait in 1990. Kuwait was
one of many wealthy Arab countries that used to provide the Palestinians
with billions of dollars in aid every year. When Kuwait was liberated a
year later by the US-led coalition, hundreds of thousands of
Palestinians were deported from Kuwait and other Gulf countries. When
Saddam fired rockets at Israel during the first Gulf War, the
Palestinians took to the streets to dance and cheer.

Palestinians also took to the streets to celebrate the 9/11 attacks
carried out by al-Qaeda. In the past decade, they have also rejoiced
each time Hamas or Hezbollah fired rockets or carried out suicide
attacks against Israel. Scenes of Palestinians handing out sweets in the
aftermath of suicide bombings and other terror attacks are commonplace on the Palestinian street.

Another sign of Palestinian support for dictators and terrorists
emerged in August 2017, when President Mahmoud Abbas sent the leader of
North Korea, Kim Jong-Un, a telegram congratulating him for "Liberation
Day." In his letter, Abbas said
the Korean people "sacrificed the most precious sacrifices for its
freedom and honor" and expressed his appreciation to the support North
Korea has shown the Palestinian people in their fight for freedom."

So, Palestinian history is packed with support for terrorists and
despots. The Palestinian Authority ambassador's participation in a rally
together with Hafiz Saeed was anything but an "unintentional mistake."
In fact, it reflects a long-standing Palestinian tradition of siding
with evil and ruthless leaders, regimes, groups and terrorists.

The response from many Indians is encouraging. Something good has
come out of the fiasco surrounding the Palestinian ambassador's
association with a global terrorist: the Indians now know the depth of
Palestinian admiration for, and glorification of, terrorists and their
thirst for violence. The Indians also realize now that Israel is their
ally in the war on terrorism -- certainly not the Palestinians, who
again and again align themselves with those who seek death and
destruction.

Bassam Tawil is a Muslim based in the Middle East.Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11662/palestinians-india-wrong-side Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

If those running the progressive left think stonewalling the Election Integrity Commission was smart, they have outsmarted themselves. They are not going to like Plan B. Not. At. All.

Before progressives start celebrating the dissolution of the Election Integrity Commission, they had better figure out what lies ahead. President Trump announced late yesterday that the Election Integrity Commission, headed by Kansas secretary of state Kris Kobach, will be dissolved.

"Rather than engage in endless legal battles at taxpayer expense, today President Donald J. Trump signed an executive order to dissolve the Commission, and he has asked the Department of Homeland Security to review its initial findings and determine next courses of action," White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said in a statement.The commission, led by Vice President Mike Pence and Kansas [s]ecretary of [s]tate Kris Kobach, had asked all 50 states and the District of Columbia to hand over reams of personal voter data, including voters' names, voting histories[,] and party affiliations.

If the left thinks it's home free, and that this announcement is a victory, it had better remember whom it is dealing with: a man who is accustomed to encountering obstacles and overcoming them – one way or another. Kris Kobach and Donald Trump are in sync.

Kobach characterized the decision to dissolve the bipartisan group as a "tactical change" and argued DHS can pursue an investigation of election fraud more quickly and efficiently.

"What's happening is a tactical shift where the mission of the commission is being handed off to Homeland Security without the stonewalling by Democrats," Kobach told Breitbart News."I'll be working closely with the White House and DHS to ensure [that] the investigations continue," Kobach continued.

I think the left has outsmarted itself by making alleged "Russian hacking" of the election a national security issue. This opens the door for DHS – armed with far more investigatory power than any commission might exercise – to go full bore at election fraud. President Trump tried it the nice way, only to encounter obstruction. Now it is time for Plan B, and I am pretty sure that Democrats will not like it at all.

And it is not as though there are no problems:

Kobach, who served as vice chairman of the voter fraud commission, blasted organizations like the ACLU and NAACP, along with Democrats in Congress and on the commission who attempted to halt the panel in its tracks."They have absolutely no interest in stopping voter fraud," Kobach said. "It's truly extraordinary that one party in our system has made clear that they don't care.""Some people on the [l]eft were getting uncomfortable about how much we were finding out," Kobach continued.Thus far, the voter fraud commission has revealed:

938 convictions for voter fraud since the year 2000

Fewer than 1 in 100 cases ends in a conviction

In Kansas, alone, there are 127 known cases of non-citizen aliens registering to vote

In 21 states, there were 8,471 cases of double[-]voting discovered

The commission will now more soundly operate without hold-ups in courts, lawsuits, and political battles, a move that Kobach says Democrats brought onto themselves."The investigations will continue now, but they won't be able to stall [it] through litigation," Kobach told Breitbart News.

Those running the progressive left understand the stakes in vote fraud: their power. That is why this move toward energetic investigation under the mantle of national security may be far more fateful than it appears on the surface. Before trying to obstruct President Trump, be careful what you wish for.

Thomas LifsonSource: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/01/uncovering_vote_fraud_plan_b_begins.html Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Egypt's state-run press
persists in the practice of condemning the United States and Israel --
an attitude that contradicts President el-Sisi's positions and vision
for reforming Islam

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi responded to U.S. President Donald Trump's official recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital with cautious pessimism. He warned his ally
in the White House not to take measures that would undermine prospects
for peace in the Middle East. The delicate balancing act he has been
performing, to avoid jeopardizing his relationship with Washington, and
at the same time not antagonize the Palestinians and much of the
Egyptian public, was probably to be expected.

Not expected was the depth of extremist anti-American and anti-Israel
sentiment spread by Egypt's state-run media. Two particularly jarring
examples illustrate this disturbing trend.

The first was from television host Ahmed Moussa,
on the Sada Elbalad network, who proceeded to denounce the United
States as the world's bully, an international thug that supposedly both
manages terrorism and manipulates it to justify its policies. He claimed
that it was Egypt that led the world against Trump's Jerusalem
declaration, and that the U.S. was trying to control Egypt by lodging
false accusations of human rights violations and discrimination against
Christians. He actually said this in spite of "what have now become regular assaults by Islamic militants on the country's Coptic community."

The second, and even more disturbing, example was a broadcast by Al Nahar TV's Gaber Al-Armouti.
First, Al-Armouti celebrated a prayer delivered during the Friday
sermon at Cairo's Al-Azhar Grand Mosque, by its imam, Mohammed Zaki:
"May Allah doom Trump with defeat." Then he said he wished that the imam
had cursed Israel, its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and all of
its people. He subsequently praised the female teenage Palestinian
provocateur, Ahed Tamimi,
who slapped an Israeli soldier and called him a "moron and son of
moron." When her father, during a phone interview with Al-Armouti, said
that his daughter's attorney is Israeli and trustworthy, the host
ignored the comment, and repeatedly yelled, "Zionist occupation," and
"Zionist enemy," referring to Israelis as kelab (the derogatory Arabic word for "dog.")

Al-Armouti also decried that many Egyptians and other Arabs follow the IDF spokesman to the Arab press, Maj. Avichay Adraee,
on social media, and share his "vicious" tweets, posts and news items.
He then cursed Adraee, and expressed the wish that he be burned "in life
and the afterlife." He also denounced all Israeli normalization
initiatives as fake, claiming that their goal is to destroy Arabs and
their countries; and said that ISIS has clear connections with Israel,
which he called the "first, last, worst, and most dangerous enemy" and
"son of bitch."

He concluded by stating, "Our enemies are not Qatar or Turkey;
ultimately, we will reconcile with them. Only Israel will always be our
enemy." He finished off with the prayer: "Allah, our God, kill Netanyahu
and destroy his state!"

A few months ago, Israel's ambassador in Cairo, David Govrin, pointed to a shift
in the Egyptian media's attitude towards Israel. "[The number of]
poisonously critical articles and anti-Semitic cartoons has declined
compared to the 1990s," Govrin said, during a lecture at the Institute
for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv. This may be true, but it does
not explain how it is that the state-run press persists in the practice
of condemning the United States and Israel -- an attitude that
contradicts el-Sisi's positions and vision for reforming Islam.

This is one of the conflicts
that still beleaguer Egyptian society -- or perhaps signs of a growing
power struggle. What is urgently needed -- to keep the next generation
from being brainwashed by hate-filled, anti-Western propaganda -- is for
all the pro-peace voices in the country's media to work together and in
conjunction with the el-Sisi government, to report the news and present
the facts in an objective and professional way.

A. Z. Mohamed is a Muslim born and raised in the Middle East.Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11678/egypt-state-media Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Coal is China's main constraint on her ambition to subjugate Asia.

There is no doubt that China wants to subjugate Asia, echoing Japan's role during World War II. For those who think China's economy might overtake the United States economy, and thus make China a more formidable adversary, this article aims to provide detail on China's main constraint in that ambition: that its domestic coal production is near its peak and will then go into long-term decline.

Even if China can keep its energy supply constant with an accelerated expansion of its nuclear power sector, the cost of producing coal from deeper mines will mean that the costs of industrial production will rise due to higher feedstock costs. One of the reasons that China produces the world's cheapest solar panels, for example, is because it has some of the world's cheapest coal-fired power. German solar panel-producers are hobbled by that country's energiewende, which, translated from the German, means the miracle required to replace coal and nuclear power with sunbeams and breezes and still have a functioning economy.

Figure 1: The United States and China: Primary Energy Consumption by fuel in 2016.

To put China's situation in perspective, Figure 1 shows the contributions to total energy supply in China and the United States in 2016 expressed in millions of tonnes of oil equivalent (data from the 2017 BP Statistical Review of World Energy). [Editor's note: One tonne, or metric ton, is equal to about 1.102 U.S. tons.] Coal absolutely dominates China's energy supply. This would be good for China if its coal were going to last a long time. But China is depleting is coal endowment rapidly.

Figure 2: World Coal Production, 1830-2014.

One of the reasons why the U.K. dominated the Industrial Revolution is because it was the major coal-producer on the planet at the time. China now dominates world coal production with half the total.

Figure 3: UK Coal and Oil Production, 1853-2016.

What goes up in fossil fuel production must eventually come down. A classic case of that is the U.K., which provides two fossil fuel production peaks. That country's coal production peaked in 1913 and, over the subsequent century, fell to a little over one hundredth of the peak production rate.

Figure 4: China's domestic coal supply, 1950-2100.

Figure 4 is taken from a review written by five Chinese academics of physical supply and energy return on investment of fossil fuels in China. The solid blue area is their best estimate of China's future coal production, with the peak year just two years away in 2020. Then, after 2030, production is expected to fall about half as fast as it rose from 2000 to 2012.

The implications of this are profound. According to the theory of resource extraction, the coal that is easiest to mine is mined first, and then, after half of the total resource is mined and consumed, operating costs per tonne start rising as supply falls. The era of the cheap energy that fueled China's economic expansion in the 21st century is almost over. Note the little spike in production on the graph in 1960, which was due to the Great Leap Forward.

Figure 5: China Fuel Consumption, 1965-2030.

China is now the largest oil-importer at eight million barrels per day. Up to one million barrels per day of this has been going into building the country's strategic petroleum reserve. China wants to avoid some of Japan's mistakes in World War II, and thus its strategic petroleum reserve is thought to be close to one billion barrels. This includes a cargo of crude sold from the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve at Bryan Mound that was unloaded at the port of Qingdao in China. Selling down one's strategic reserves ahead of an event that will call upon strategic reserves is unwise. China's domestic oil production peaked in 2015 at four million barrels per day and is now in long-term decline, falling at about 250,000 barrels per day per annum. The forecast has oil consumption flat in line with an economy that is growing at Japanese-type rates. Any increase in demand will increase China's import dependency, though it does have a coal-to-liquids industry that could produce up to a million barrels per day.

China's coal production increased at 8.3% per annum from 2000 to 2012, with economic growth at about the same rate over that period. The production peak is expected to be in 2020, with a moderate initial rate of decline that accelerates to 60 million tonnes per annum from 2028. For electric power production, part of that decline will be made good by China's nuclear power plant build. As the cost of coal rises in China, the economics of nuclear power will improve. But if China wants to have any economic growth from here, it will have to either start importing a lot of coal or accelerate its nuclear plant build.

Either way, the salad days of China's economic growth are over. In fact, the Chinese will have to paddle harder, year after year, to stop economic contraction.

Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/01/heres_what_is_holding_back_chinas_plans_for_world_domination.html Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Developments over the past few decades, culminating in the
American intervention in Iraq and the “Arab Spring,” have resulted in
major Iranian achievements irrespective of the nuclear issue.

Iran Supreme Leader Ali Khameini, image via Wikimedia CC

BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 706, January 4, 2018

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Iran has emerged as the
big winner of the so-called “Arab Spring.” Russia also benefited
greatly – it achieved its aims in Syria by helping to preserve the Assad
regime, and in the process, became the key broker of the postwar
settlement – but Tehran made major gains not only in Syria but in Iraq,
Yemen, and Lebanon as well.

Iran has emerged as the winner of the so-called
“Arab Spring,” a state of affairs some lay at the feet of the Obama
administration. When the US administration (together with five other
powers) signed a nuclear accord with Tehran to curb its nuclear program,
it did not insist on a halt to Iran’s assorted aggressions in the
Middle East.

But Obama is not entirely to blame for Iran’s
success. In each of the four Arab countries in which Tehran has made
incursions, its rivals inadvertently played a key role in strengthening
the Iranian position through the trans-border Shiite connection.

In other words, interventions by other foreign
powers unintentionally strengthened the pro-Iranian Shiite group in each
of the countries in question. In some cases (though not all), the
outcome was influenced by nationalist opposition to foreign
interference. In all four cases, however, the interventions reinforced a
regional transnational sectarian connection that is enabling the
fulfillment of Iranian aspirations to become the dominant force in the
Middle East.

How have the other intervening powers helped Iran win the Middle East game (at least for now)?

Iraq

In the case of Iraq, another enemy of the Islamic
Republic accidentally brought about Iranian dominance in a country that
used to be a major rival. In this instance it was the US that played the
key role. Following their 2003 occupation of Iraq, the Americans tried
to democratize the country. But elections in an ethnically and
religiously fragmented state like Iraq mean that the largest ethnic or
sectarian group is going to win.

The Shiites are the majority group in a polarized
Iraq, and some of their leaders are allies of the Iranian Shiite regime.
This trans-border connection has guaranteed significant Iranian
influence in Iraq. Thus, the US invasion and democratization project in
Iraq brought to power forces allied with its main enemy in the region –
even if the alliance with Tehran is not welcomed by all Iraqis,
including some Shiites.

Syria

The third case of an external intervention that
resulted in growing Iranian influence is the Russian involvement in
Syria. In this instance, the intervening power is not an enemy of Iran’s
– at the moment. It was one for a very long time, however, and the
future of the alliance is uncertain.

At any rate, the Russian bombing in 2015 was the
decisive factor that ultimately brought about the victory of the Assad
regime in the Syrian civil war. This is the case even though Tehran,
Hezbollah, and other Iranian-led Shiite militias had been fighting
alongside the regime since well before the Russian bombing started.

As in the other cases, the support of Iran and its
Shiite allies for the Alawite regime in Damascus is based at least
partly on a common sectarian affiliation, as the Alawites are considered
an offshoot of Shiite Islam. The Assad regime’s dependence on the
Iranian/Shiite militias’ support seems to guarantee that Tehran will
remain a major influence in Syria.

While the Russian bombing provided the coup de
grâce, the Iranians and their allies continue to provide the ground
forces necessary to preserve the regime. Israel is worried that the
regime’s debt to Iran will translate into a continuous Iranian/Hezbollah
military presence in Syria near the border with the Israeli-controlled
Golan Heights. Recent Russian statements seem to indicate Moscow’s
acceptance of such a military presence. This forward military deployment
of Iran and its allies creates the potential for escalation, whether
intended or inadvertent.

Yemen

Finally, there is the case of the war in Yemen,
which grinds on at great cost to the civilian population. We can’t be
sure about the outcome as the war is still ongoing, but at least one
thing is clear: The persistent bombing by the Saudi-led Sunni coalition
has failed to remove from power the Shiite-affiliated Houthis, who still
control a considerable part of the country. Moreover, the Sunni
military campaign against them has reinforced the Houthis’ alliance with
Tehran and probably alienated a large proportion of the Yemeni
population from the Saudis and their Sunni allies, creating another
bastion of Iranian influence in the Arab world.

In this case the stronghold is adjacent to Iran’s
number one opponent in the Arab world: Saudi Arabia. Here, too, the
situation contains the potential for an escalation in which the
Iranian-Saudi cold war turns hot.

Conclusion

The instability and polarization that characterize
the Middle East raise doubts about the future of the Iranian rise.
Still, developments over the past few decades, culminating in the
American intervention in Iraq and the “Arab Spring,” have resulted in
major Iranian achievements irrespective of the nuclear issue. The causes
of these gains in the four countries discussed here are 1) the
sectarian divisions in the region, particularly the trans-border Shiite
connection; and 2) the effects of external intervention.

In most cases, those effects – which were based on
nationalist/sectarian resentment of the external intervening force –
were unintended. In the Syrian instance, however, the outcome reflects
the military victory of the intervening force. In all four cases, Iran
is the regional power that has gained the most.

This poses a major challenge to Riyadh and its
Sunni allies, as well as to Israel. It largely explains the recent
Saudi-Israeli rapprochement, manifested in the recent, unprecedented
interview of Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. General Gadi Eisenkot by a Saudi
news outlet. In the interview, Eisenkot highlighted the perception of
the Iranian threat shared by the two parties and declared Israel’s
willingness to share intelligence with Riyadh. Such developments could
augur a major realignment in the Middle East with far-reaching
implications for both war and peace.

For war, the key implication is the rising
likelihood of a confrontation between Israel and Iranian allies in Syria
and Lebanon, notably Hezbollah, although mutual deterrence is likely to
reduce the probability of actual fighting.

For peace, the emerging Israeli-Saudi/Sunni
alliance, based on the “enemy of my enemy is my friend” principle,
creates the potential for progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace
process. But in that context, there is a crucial role for the Trump
administration, which maintains good relations with both Israel and the
Saudis.

This will be a key challenge for the US
administration, which thus far has essentially maintained US
disengagement from the Middle East. That disengagement is likely to
accelerate with the destruction of ISIS in Syria and Iraq. The new
developments in Israeli-Sunni relations create a great opportunity for
the administration. It might be tempted to take advantage of it to rack
up some accomplishments in foreign policy, which have been sparse so
far.

BESA Center Perspectives Papers are published through the generosity of the Greg Rosshandler Family

Prof. Benjamin Miller is a professor of International Relations at the School of Political Sciences, the University of Haifa.Source: https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/how-iran-became-dominant/ Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Arts, appeasement and AIDS bombs.

“We pay the Palestinians HUNDRED OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS a year and get no appreciation or respect,” President Trump tweeted. “With the Palestinians no longer willing to talk peace, why should we make any of these massive future payments to them?”

The President of the United States has a very good point. But it’s not
as if the Islamic terrorists in the West Bank and Gazan territories of
Israel have ever been willing to do more than occasionally talk peace
before getting bored and stomping away from the table. And then stabbing
a few children to death.

The United States has paid the PLO’s
Palestinian Authority billions to occasionally pretend to talk about
peace. There isn’t a dollar amount high enough to get the terrorists to
actually agree to peace.

We know two things about the
terrorist leader who will succeed Arafat and Abbas. His name will start
with an ‘A’ and like Arafat and Abbas, he’ll wait around for the perfect
moment in a peace negotiation with a lefty president before, as Arafat
did to Clinton and Abbas did to Obama, breaking it all up.

And
that’s one of the priceless things that the fake terror statelet of the
Palestinian Authority gives us for our hundreds of millions of dollars.
Every decade its leader will lead on a lefty and then leave him at the
altar. It may cost us another few billion, but somewhere around 2026,
President Cory Booker will be certain that he’s finally solved the
Palestinian problem only to sit there confused with egg on his face.

Is that worth hundreds of millions of dollars a year? Maybe not. But
it’s also a good lesson to lefties that they don’t understand the Muslim
world and that no matter how hard they try, they never will.

But that’s not all that we get for our money.

The peace process with the PLO was the original test case for the Arab
Spring and the Iran Deal. All three were founded on the same stupid
belief that if you give the terrorists almost everything they want, they
won’t kill you. Every year that passes shows that no matter what you
give them, the terrorists will kill you. Bribing killers doesn’t work.
Meeting their demands is impossible because there are always more.

If we had paid more attention to Arafat’s lying smirk, maybe we
wouldn’t have fallen for the Arab Spring or the Iran Deal. And that’s
another thing that the terrorists give us in exchange for all our
hundreds of millions of dollars a year. The Palestinian Authority is a
living museum of terrorist treachery. Its peace negotiations are an
ongoing demonstration of the folly of appeasing terrorists.

Most small children learn not to put their hands on a hot stove at a
very young age. Unfortunately none of them become politicians. And so
every time a new president starts thinking about appeasing Islamic
terrorists by letting them take over Egypt or develop nuclear weapons,
he can test his terrorist appeasement theories in the confines of the
smaller sandbox of the West Bank and Gaza.

Decades of testing
have thus far produced no peace and no smarter politicians. After a few
hundred years of peace negotiations, there still won’t be any peace.
But maybe there will be smarter politicians.

Of the two impossible things in this scenario, smarter politicians are more plausible than nicer terrorists.

If we can just keep the peace process going for another few centuries,
maybe our distant descendants will finally figure out that appeasing
terrorists really doesn’t work. Not even if you offer them parts of
Jerusalem, freeze settlements and agree to build a giant statue of
Mohammed’s flying demon horse.

But that’s not all that we get from the hundreds of millions of dollars that we lavish on terrorist welfare.

Consider the arts.

The PLO’s takeover of the territories in ’67 Israel unleashed an
unprecedented burst of artistic creativity. There’s hardly a gray
concrete wall anywhere in Ramallah that isn’t decorated with murals of a
smiling Arafat beaming down on the wretched suckers he spent his life
ripping off. And then there are the posters of the suicide bombers, the
ritual burnings of American flags and the Jihadist poetry readings.

“Our blood is food for the revolution/Yasser Arafat, for you we shall
die” and “Sons of Zion, most evil among creation/barbaric apes and
wretched ‎pigs” are examples of the arts
that we subsidize. And while those poems may sound pretty horrible,
they’re still better than what we get for our money at the NEA.

And then there’s the pioneering technological research being carried out by top PLO scientists.

Before the Car Jihad could be efficiently deployed on the streets of
New York, Nice, Barcelona and London, it was field tested by expert
Palestinian researchers in Jerusalem. Suicide bombings, airline
hijackings and many of the other tools of the modern Islamic terrorist
were refined in the PLO lab.

The hundreds of millions of
dollars we spend each year funding the PLO is an investment in new
terror tools and techniques. The terrorists of tomorrow are counting on
us to fund their research. And every dollar we give the Palestinian
Authority is an investment in helping the terrorists kill us in new and
interesting ways. The possibilities are as horrifying as they are
endless.

Back in ’04, a member of the PLO’s Fatah faction tried to build an AIDS bomb.

Rami Abdullah, an engineering student, wanted to blow himself up while
carrying blood from a donor infected with AIDS. "After a period, it
will kill a lot of people," he explained.

Abdullah has already promised that if he gets out, he’ll try to live the dream of building an AIDS bomb.

An AIDS bomb plot by Tanzim, the most violent terror arm of the Palestinian Authority, was planned
over Passover back then. But the lab Jihadis never figured out how to
make it work. One day though, if we keep funding them, they might figure
it out. And then we too can enjoy AIDS bombs in our cities.

And isn’t that worth a mere few hundred million dollars a year?

We could stop funding terrorists. Also we could stop smoking, running
full tilt into glass doors and finally pull off that New Year’s
resolution to stop drinking antifreeze. Those would all be good ideas.
And they would make us safer and happier. So you can expect Washington
D.C. to reject them out of hand.

The experts are convinced
that if we don’t fund the terrorists, they’ll behave even worse. So far
we haven’t actually tested this theory. No one wants to find out what
they can come up with that’s worse than an AIDS bomb.

But if
anyone in Washington D.C. can stop doing that stupid thing all the
experts insist we need to do, it’s President Trump. And so just maybe
this can be the year we stop running into glass doors, drinking
antifreeze and funding terrorists. We may lose out on some Arafat murals
and AIDS bombs, but the Americans who are regularly killed every year
by Palestinian Islamic terrorists will thank him for it.

And
if not, we can always look forward to President Elizabeth Warren being
humiliated by President Ahmed of the PLO as he walks away from the table
despite being offered 99% of Israel and Netanyahu’s first-born son. And
then unleashes toddler stone throwers and AIDS suicide bombers across
Jerusalem.

Because that’s what we get for our hundreds of millions of dollars. That’s all we’ll ever get from the PLO.

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/268921/what-we-get-hundreds-millions-we-give-terrorists-daniel-greenfield Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

What's behind their social, political, and even economic grievances.

What began on December 28 as local protests against high food prices in the northern city of Mashhad, Iran, has spiraled into mass protests consisting of some hundreds of thousands of Iranians in some two dozen cities, including if not especially Tehran, the seat of government. So far over 20 people have been killed and many hundreds arrested in what has been widely described as “the most serious internal crisis the country has faced this decade.”

The protests have morphed from mundane topics concerning the economy to more existential topics concerning Islamic leadership. Reportedly hundreds of thousands of protesters have been heard shouting “We don’t want an Islamic Republic,” and calling blessings on Reza Shah, the staunch secularist and political reformer who did much to Westernize Iran, until his son and successor, Muhammad Reza Shah was deposed during the Islamic Revolution of 1979. According to Mideast media, women—such as Maryam Rajavi—are spearheading the current protests (and symbolically rejecting Islamic impositions by publicly removing their hijabs).

Even the Iranian regime sees the current unrest as a revolt against Islam. In his initial remarks after demonstrations first erupted, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei said, “All those who are against the Islamic Republic … have all joined forces in order to create problems for the Islamic Republic and the Islamic Revolution” (note the recurrent and telling adjective “Islamic”).

Even so, “mainstream media” see growing poverty and frustration at the lack of social freedoms as the only reasons behind the current unrest. Overlooked in their analysis is that, because Islam is not meant to be a “spiritual thing” one does privately, but is rather a complete system of governance, permeating the whole of private and social life, the ongoing protests in Iran, while ostensibly revolving around economic, social, and political issues, are ultimately protests against Islamic teachings concerning economic, social, and political issues, which the Islamic Republic of Iran has been imposing on the populace since coming to power in 1979.
This is evident even in the new rallying cry of the protestors—“Death to the Dictator”—in reference to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei himself. By its very nature, Islamic law—both Sunni and Shia—calls for dictatorial rule. So long as the caliph, sultan, or emir governs society according to Sharia, Muslims must obey him—even if he is a despicable and cruel personage. After examining a number of Islamic rulings from authoritative exegetes, as well as a number of statements attributed to Muslim prophet Muhammad and in the Koran concerning the importance for Muslims to follow Islamic law—which is the only relevant question of when Muslims should and should not seek to overthrow their ruler—Ayman al-Zawahiri writes,

To summarize: It is forbidden to overthrow a tyrant, but it is a duty to overthrow an infidel. If the ruler is despotic, it is unlawful for a Muslim to rally other Muslims in order to condemn him, for if they do so then they become the aggressors and it becomes incumbent for the sultan to fight them (Al Qaeda Reader, p. 122).

As it happens, the social oppression currently being protested against in Iran—from second-class status for women, to bans on all forms of expression critical of Islam, its prophet, and his representative on earth—is mandated by Islamic law, making the protestors “the aggressors.”

But even the economic aspects of the protests are largely by-products of Islamist aspirations. As Donald Trump tweeted last Friday, the Iranian “people are finally getting wise as to how their money and wealth is being stolen and squandered on terrorism. Looks like they will not take it any longer.” Indeed, the economic suffering of the people has come at a time when the regime has grown rich—not least by Obama giving them over $100 billion as part of a nuclear deal. The reason for this disparity is that the regime has been and continues to spend much of its wealth in trying to realize its stated Islamic ideals; it prefers supporting Hezbollah (currently Forbes wealthiest terrorist organization) and Hamas (third wealthiest) against the nearest “infidel” enemy, Israel, in the name of and for the greater glory of Islam, rather than feed its people.

Incidentally, because the right to protest is a given in the West, and thus occurs often, including over trivial and/or absurd matters—as when university students planned a “sh*t-in,” occupying restrooms as a way of demanding more “gender-neutral facilities”—the grave consequences of the current protests in Iran are indicative of just how fed up Iranians are—and the fatal risks they are willing to take—which, unsurprisingly, also trace back to Islam:

Protesters could also potentially face the death penalty when their cases come to trial, according to the head of Tehran's Revolutionary Court, the AP reported. Iran’s semiofficial Tasnim news agency quoted Mousa Ghazanfarabadi as saying: “Obviously one of their charges can be Moharebeh,” or waging war against God [Allah], which is a death penalty offense in Iran.

Moharebeh is precisely what al-Zawahiri was referring to in the above excerpt: the only legitimate reason to overthrow an Islamic ruler is his failure to govern according to Islam—which Khamenei and his regime can hardly be accused of. Seeking to depose him because he is personally corrupt, despotic, cruel, or spending more money on jihad than food is forbidden, and makes the protestors aggressors against Allah, a crime worthy of punishment, including death.

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a Judith Friedman Rosen Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum and a CBN News contributor. He is the author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians(2013) and The Al Qaeda Reader(2007). Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/268919/are-iranians-really-protesting-against-islam-raymond-ibrahim Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Pyongyang is changing its strategy towards Seoul
in order to earn credit that it can use to ease sanctions without
sacrificing deterrence.

Medals of the XXIII Olympic Winter Games 2018 in Pyeongchang South Korea, image via Wikimedia CC

BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 707, January 4, 2018

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The
good news is that the 2018 Winter Olympics, which will be held in
PyeongChang, South Korea, might serve as a venue for confidence-building
measures towards negotiations between South and North Korea. The bad
news is that North Korea has no intention of giving up its nuclear and
missile capabilities. Pyongyang is changing its strategy towards Seoul
in order to earn credit that it can use to ease sanctions without
sacrificing deterrence.

On February 9, 2018, the Winter Olympic Games will
begin in PyeongChang, South Korea. South Korean President Moon Jae-in
has said he hopes Pyongyang will overcome the various political and
security issues and join the Games. The Olympics could set the scene for
confidence-building measures (CBM) that ease tensions on the Korean
Peninsula ahead of restarting negotiations between Pyongyang and Seoul.

The door to the Winter Olympics was left open for
Pyongyang, even after it missed the deadline. In a speech at the start
of 2018, Kim Jung-un stated that barring unexpected developments, North
Korea will indeed send a delegation.

According to analysts, North Korea’s participation
in the Games would be part of a “peaceful offensive” strategy that is
itself part of a dual strategic policy: on the one hand, to strengthen
North Korean deterrence against Washington; and on the other, to promote
the “pacific” side of North Korea to gain credit in Seoul and
Washington without giving up the nuclear arsenal.

For South Korea, as for any state that wins the
right to host the Olympics, the event serves as a venue in which the
hosting country can present to the world its economic, technological,
sports, and tourist attractions, as well as its cultural achievements.
The global media coverage of the Games gives the state an opportunity to
project a positive “brand.” Seoul hopes the PyeongChang Games will
allow it to present South Korea in its best light – without focusing on
the nuclear or missile crisis with North Korea.

One of Seoul’s biggest concerns is that Pyongyang
will not abide by the Olympic spirit of peace among nations and might
conduct long-range missile (ICBM) or nuclear tests either before or
during the Games. If it does so, Pyongyang will seize global attention
and embarrass both Washington and Seoul. For the time being, Pyongyang
plans to attend the Games because it believes it is in North Korea’s
interest to be there, but in the case of Kim Jong-un, anything can
change at any moment.

President Moon offered to postpone the upcoming
South Korean military exercise with US forces in the region in order to
ease tensions on the Peninsula. US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson
stated a few times that Washington is willing to come back to the
negotiations table with Pyongyang. North Korea did not respond to any of
these offers.

Washington and Seoul are extending a hand to
Pyongyang, but at the same time, they have begun to prepare the military
option, and Washington passed new economic sanctions on North Korea at
the UNSC. Moscow and Beijing, which have not supported increasing
sanctions in the past, did not veto them this time – but it is by no
means assured that they will fully implement them, as they have failed
to do so in the past.

If the economic sanctions on North Korea are fully
implemented, the economy will be downsized in the long run and
Pyongyang will be forced to respond. It will provoke or offer tactical
concessions, but has no intention of giving up its nuclear or missile
capabilities.

Another deterrent layer is the messaging of
President Donald Trump and National Security Advisor General HR
McMaster, who have stated that the military option is on the table. The
mixed signals sent by the US raise concerns in the region that either
Pyongyang or Washington will misunderstand the other and a conflict will
erupt unintentionally.

The PyeongChang Winter Olympics could conceivably
be the venue for the beginning of incremental change in the Korean
Peninsula – but Pyongyang is playing a different ballgame. Its main
rival is Washington, not Seoul.

Kim Jung-un hinted in his New Year speech that
Pyongyang has reached its final goal of obtaining credible nuclear
deterrence versus the US. North Korea will now seek ways to negotiate
with Washington on a new agreement that will ease the sanctions by
offering tactical concessions without sacrificing its nuclear and
missile capabilities. Attending the 2018 PyeongChang Olympics is a way
for Pyongyang to begin to pursue this strategy.

Whereas over the past few months, Pyongyang has
ignored offers by President Moon, it will be now willing to entertain
offers to begin negotiations. Kim understands that in doing so, he can
maximize profits without paying much of a price.

BESA Center Perspectives Papers are published through the generosity of the Greg Rosshandler Family

Dr. Alon Levkowitz, a research associate at
the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, is an expert on East Asian
security, the Korean Peninsula, and Asian international organizations.Source: https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/2018-winter-olympics-north-korea/ Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.